The official order of the Supreme Court of India on the ban of diesel vehicles in Delhi.

1. 1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
I.A. Nos.366, 367, 368, 370, 371, 372 in I.A.No.365 in I.A.No.345,
I.A.No.369, 373, 374 in I.A. No.366 in I.A. No.365 in I.A. No.345
in Writ Petition(Civil) No.13029/1985
WITH
Writ Petition (Civil) No.817 of 2015
WITH
Writ Petition (Civil) No.116 of 2013
AND
Writ Petition (Civil) No.728 of 2015
M.C.MEHTA Petitioner
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondents
O R D E R
We had by our order dated 9th
October, 2015 issued certain
directions, aimed at mitigating the hardship which the people
living in Delhi undergo having regard to the high of pollution
in the city that has earned to it the dubious reputation of
being the most polluted city in the world. We had among others
directed the following measures to be taken:
(1) The Governments of the States of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana
and Rajasthan shall take steps to ensure that commercial
traffic for destinations other than Delhi use alternative
routes and to ensure that in the course of implementation of
the said direction no traffic jams and other inconvenience is
caused to the public.
(2) The Government of NCT of Delhi shall direct issue
advertisements to inform commercial traffic of the bypass
routes and the imposition of the ECC imposed by this Court for
entry of the vehicles into Delhi.
(3) The toll collectors shall put in place Radio Frequency
Digitally signed by
Mahabir Singh
Date: 2015.12.16
13:36:31 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified

2. 2
Identification (RFID) systems at their own costs at nine main
entry points in the city by November 30, 2015 and by 31st
January, 2016 at all the remaining 118 entry points to the
city. The NCT Government shall install its own CCTV cameras at
nine entry points and also organise surprise visits to oversee
the collection of ECC and other necessary arrangements.
We had by the same order directed levy and collection of
ECC at the following rates:
(i) The Category 2 (light duty vehicles etc.) and Category 3
(2 axle trucks) at the rate of Rs.700/- per vehicle;
(ii) Category 4 (3 axle trucks) and Category 5 (4 axle trucks
and above) at the rate of Rs.1300/- per truck.
Passenger vehicles, ambulances and vehicles carrying
essential commodities like food stuffs and oil tankers for
Delhi were exempted from the above charges.
Mr. Harish N. Salve, learned senior counsel appearing as
amicus, argued that imposition of ECC and the directions issued
by this Court regarding diversion of commercial vehicles/trucks
to alternative routes has made some difference but the
pollution levels continue to remain high despite such measures.
He submitted by reference to the material placed on record that
the level of pollution detected on or before 9th
October, 2015
was infact lower than the levels recorded on subsequent dates.
Mr. Salve further submitted that although diversion of vehicles
to alternative routes in terms of the order passed by this
Court was given effect to belatedly on 6th
November, 2015, yet
the said direction has not been effectively enforced inasmuch
as vehicles not bound for Delhi are being allowed to enter
Delhi on payment of the prescribed ECC. It was submitted that

3. 3
the true spirit of the order passed by this Court was that
vehicles that were bound for Delhi alone were to enter Delhi
and other vehicles bound for other destinations/cities were
supposed to bypass Delhi by using alternative routes. He drew
our attention to a similar direction issued by this Court in
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Others – (2003) 10 SCC 561.
It was in that view urged that the order passed by this Court
on 9th
October, 2015 could be modified/clarified to make it
clear that the State Governments shall take steps to divert
vehicles that are not bound for Delhi through alternative
routes especially those using National Highway-8 and National
Highway-1 for entering the national capital. It was also
contended by Mr. Salve that in order to effectively discourage
vehicles from entering Delhi, the ECC could be revised upwards
especially when the Government of NCT of Delhi, the M.C.D. and
the Union of India were all agreeable to the same.
Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor General appearing for
the Union of India, submitted that diversion of traffic away
from Delhi by use of alternative routes as also by way of
enhancement of the ECC has been thoroughly discussed with the
learned Amicus Curiae and that the Union of India and so also
the Government of NCT have no objection to such a direction
being issued. He submitted that as a matter of fact discussions
held between the representatives of the two governments,
namely, Union of India and Government of NCT of Delhi as also
the M.C.D. had led to a consensus on five other points also on
which this Court could issue suitable directions to help reduce

4. 4
the pollution levels in Delhi. It was submitted that the
revision of ECC could be upto 100% of the amount already
stipulated for vehicles that are Delhi bound while other
vehicles which are not bound for Delhi could be directed to
bypass Delhi by using alternative routes which the two
governments could be directed to specify.
By our order dated 6th
December, 2001 passed in M.C. Mehta
v. Union of India and Others – (2003) 10 SCC 561, we had, inter
alia, directed :
“8. It appears that vehicles which transit through
Delhi do not adhere to the vehicular standards which
are applicable in Delhi, namely, they are not Euro
II-compliant nor are they using low sulphur and low
benzene fuel. There is no reason why very large
number of goods vehicles should transit through Delhi
thereby adding to the pollution level and the traffic
on the road.
9. It is, therefore, proposed that with effect from
15.1.2002 no heavy-, medium- or light-goods vehicles
will ply on inter-State routes by passing through
Delhi or New Delhi. It is only those goods vehicles
which on payment of octroi/toll tax carry goods to or
from Delhi which would be allowed to ply. The
Commissioner of Police is directed to formulate a
scheme in this behalf and give due publicity to all
concerned and implement the same.”
Our order dated 9th
October, 2015 was in the same spirit
intended to act as a restraint against vehicles not bound for
Delhi entering Delhi. The said direction appears to have been
understood to mean as though vehicles not bound for Delhi could
also enter Delhi provided they pay ECC. The true intention,
however, was that the vehicles that are not bound for Delhi are
diverted to alternative routes to bypass Delhi. The levy of ECC
has no doubt resulted in some diversion of such vehicles but a
very large number of vehicles not bound for Delhi still appear

5. 5
to be entering Delhi on payment of ECC, stipulated by us. In
the circumstances, we consider it necessary to make it clear
that no vehicle which is not bound for Delhi will be allowed to
enter from N.H.-8 which connects Jaipur to Delhi and N.H.-1
that connects the States of Punjab, Haryana and other northern
States to Delhi via Kundli border. We are limiting the
restraint order to these two entry points for the present
because from the figures given to us the largest number of
vehicles that are entering into Delhi are from these two entry
points. We according direct that traffic from these two entry
points viz. Kundli border on N.H.-1 and Rajokri on N.H.-8,
shall be diverted to bypass Delhi through such alternative
routes as the transport/traffic departments of the governments
concerned may stipulate.
We are further of the view that empty/unladen vehicles
bound for Delhi, can enter Delhi on payment of the ECC earlier
stipulated by us @ Rs.700/- and Rs.1300/- per vehicle depending
upon the category to which the vehicle belongs. We, however,
direct that for Delhi bound vehicles loaded with goods, the ECC
will be twice the charge stipulated by us by our order dated 9th
October, 2015. This measure shall, in our opinion, discourage
any vehicle trying to enter Delhi on a false pretext of the
goods loaded on it being Delhi bound.
Mr. Salve next argued that the transport vehicles
registered on or before 2005 which are non-compliant with the
current pollution control standards also need to be disallowed
from entering Delhi even if the same are Delhi bound with goods

6. 6
loaded for consumption in the city. There was a consensus among
learned counsel for the parties even on this issue who
submitted that Union of India or Government of NCT of Delhi
have no real objection if a direction to that effect is issued.
We accordingly direct that while vehicles “bound for Delhi” may
enter on payment of ECC at the rates stipulated hereinabove,
those registered in the year 2005 or earlier shall not qualify
for such entry. State Governments and Union Territories
concerned shall ensure that vehicles bearing registration
numbers of the year 2005 or earlier do not enter Delhi. The
governments will evolve a suitable system for implementation of
this direction.
It was contended by Mr. Salve that since diesel vehicles
are the most polluting vehicles contributing to the current
state of affairs in Delhi, it is time to issue directions
banning registration of any new private and/commercial light
duty diesel vehicles in the National Capital Region. This
submission was opposed by Mr. Ranjit Kumar who submitted that
banning of commercial light duty diesel vehicles is likely to
affect trade and commerce within Delhi and supply of essential
commodities to the people living in the National Capital Region
especially because such vehicles are used in large numbers for
ferrying goods from one place to the other in the region.
M/s. Dushyant Dave and Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel
appearing for the automobile dealers selling diesel vehicles,
also opposed any ban on registration of new private vehicles
and commercial light duty diesel vehicles as proposed by Mr.

7. 7
Salve. Having given our anxious consideration to the
submissions made at the Bar, we are of the view that the new
commercial light duty diesel vehicles can for the present
continue being registered in Delhi on account of the dependence
of the public on such vehicles for supply of essentials. There
is, however, no reason why registration of private cars and
SUVs using diesel with an engine capacity of 2000 cc and above
should not be banned upto 31st
March, 2016. It is noteworthy
that diesel vehicles of 2000 cc and above and SUVs are
generally used by more affluent sections of our society and
because of the higher engine capacity are more prone to cause
higher levels of pollution. A ban on registration of such
vehicles will not therefore affect the common man or the
average citizen in the city of Delhi. We accordingly direct
that Registration of SUVs and private cars of the capacity of
2000 CC and above using diesel as fuel shall stand banned in
the NCR upto 31st
March, 2016.
It was then argued by Mr. Salve that all taxis including
aggregators like OLA and UBER plying in the National Capital
Region may be moved to C.N.G. fuel within a reasonable time but
not later than 1st
March, 2016. There was a general consensus on
this subject also primarily because it is hoped by all
concerned that it will contribute substantially to the
reduction of the pollution. We, therefore, direct that all
taxis including those operating under aggregators like OLA and
UBER in the NCT of Delhi, plying under city permits shall move
to C.N.G. not later than 1st
March, 2016.

8. 8
It was submitted by Mr. Salve that one of the contributors
to the pollution in the city is dust that rises from the roads
and pavements which are not fully developed. It was submitted
that Government of NCT of Delhi could be directed to vacuum
clean the roads which will substantially reduce the pollution
levels. To the credit of learned counsel for the Government of
NCT of Delhi and Union of India and the M.C.D. we must mention
that a direction to that effect was not opposed by anyone of
them. As a matter of fact, Mr. Wasim A Qadri, learned counsel
for the Government of NCT of Delhi submitted that the State
Government is very keen to undertake these steps to reduce the
pollution levels and ensure that paving of roadsides starts
immediately. Vacuum cleaning will, however, take some time as
the State Government shall have to purchase vacuum cleaning
vehicles/appliances for use on the roads.
We accordingly direct the Government of NCT of Delhi to
take immediate steps for repair of pavements and make pavements
wherever the same are missing and also to take immediate steps
for procurement of the requisite vacuum cleaning vehicles for
use on Delhi roads expeditiously but not later than 1st
April,
2016.
It was argued by learned counsel for the parties that one
of the major contributors to the current pollution levels is
the construction activities going on in the National Capital
Region. It was submitted that Union of India and State
Governments concerned must be directed to take steps to enforce
the C.P.C.B. rules and norms against those engaged in such

9. 9
construction activities to prevent further rise of pollution
levels. We see no reason to decline a direction to that effect.
C.P.C.B. norms regarding prevention of pollution by putting
curtains and other devices at construction sites must be
strictly enforced by the enforcement agencies concerned. We
direct accordingly.
It is also contended by learned counsel for the parties
that one of the contributors to the pollution is burning of
solid waste by local bodies like M.C.D., N.D.M.C and
institutions that generate such waste. It was submitted that
burning of solid waste was impermissible under the relevant
rules and that lapses on the part of the concerned authorities
in the matter of enforcing the said rules is contributing to
the deteriorating situation. It was, therefore, prayed that
authorities including the local bodies and institutions within
the National Capital Region be directed to refrain from
disposing of solid waste by burning such waste and to take
steps for proper management/disposal of such waste in a
scientific manner following the norms and the requirements of
the relevant rules in that regard. We see no reason to decline
that prayer either. We accordingly direct that the State
Government and the local bodies concerned including M.C.D.,
N.D.M.C. and all other institutions that are generating solid
waste shall take steps to ensure that no part of such waste is
burnt and that proper arrangements are made for disposal of
such waste in a scientific way without causing any hazard to
environment.

10. 10
There are a few other suggestions also mooted by learned
counsel for NCT of Delhi with which we are not dealing at
present as learned counsel for Union of India and the amicus
curiae wanted some time to examine the same and make their
submission. They may do so on or before the next date of
hearing.
Mr. Shyam Divan, learned counsel for the toll
collector-SMYR Consortium LLP, prayed for early hearing of his
(I.A. No.366) for modification of our Order dated 9th
October,
2015 as according to the learned counsel, the diversion of
vehicular traffic away from Delhi is seriously impacting the
contract entered into by the applicant with M.C.D.
In the circumstances, therefore, while we adjourn these
proceedings to Tuesday, the 5th
January, 2016 to be listed
along with all pending applications including those filed by
the toll collector, we direct that steps that we have indicated
hereinabove shall be taken by all concerned in the right
earnest notwithstanding any order to the contrary passed by any
court or authority or Tribunal whatsoever.
Post on 5th
January, 2016.
...................CJI.
(T.S. THAKUR)
.....................J.
(A.K. SIKRI)
.....................J.
(R. BANUMATHI)
NEW DELHI
DATED 16th
DECEMBER, 2015.

11. 11
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION PIL(W), X
(For Orders)
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. No(s).366, 367, 368, 370, 371, 372 in I.A.No.365 in
I.A.No.345, I.A.No.369,373, 374 in I.A. No.366 in I.A. No.365 in
I.A. No.345 in Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 13029/1985
M.C.MEHTA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(For Modification/clarification/recall of order dated 09.10.2015,
Directions, exemption from filing O.T., permission to file
Additional documents, interim stay and office report)
WITH W.P.(C) No. 817/2015
(With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report)
W.P.(C) No.116 of 2013
(With appln.(s) for Directions and permission to file additional
documents and office report)
W.P.(C) No.728 of 2015
(With appln.(s) for ex-parte stay and impleadment and office
report)
Date: 16/12/2015 These matters were called on for Orders.
Mr. Harish N. Salve,Sr.Adv. (A.C.)
Ms. Aparajita Singh, (A.C.)
Mr. A.D.N. Rao,Adv.(A.C.)
Mr. Sidhartha Choudhary,Adv.(A.C.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. M.C. Mehta,Adv.
(Petitioner-in-person)
(W.P. 817 of 2015) Mr. Jatin Zaveri,Adv.
Mr. Tanmaya Agarwal,Adv.
(W.P. 116 of 2013) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv.
(W.P. 728 OF 2015) Ms. Pooja Dhar,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar,SG
Ms. Pinky Anand,ASG
Ms. V. Mohana,Sr.Adv.
Ms. Meenakshi Grover,Adv.
Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv.
Ms. Rashmi Malhotra,Adv.
Mr. Harpreet S. Sadhu,Adv.

12. 12
Mr. Kaushal Yadav,Adv.
Mr. Mukul Singh,Adv.
Mr. S.N. Terdal,Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.
Mr. Wasim S. Qadri,Adv.
Mr. Ajay Sharma,adv.
Mr. Zaid Ali,Adv.
Mr. Tamim Qadri,Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra,Adv.
Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.
Mr. Prabal B.,Adv.
Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASG
Mr. Ajay Bansal,Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Yadava,Adv.
Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Dave,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Narain,Adv.
Mr. Chirag M. Shroff,Adv.
Mr. Rohit Kumar,Adv.
Mr. Bhaskar Das,Adv.
Mr. Ashwin Reddy,Adv.
Ms. Swati Vaibhav,Adv.
Applicant Mr. Shyam Divan,Sr.Adv.
(I.A. No.366) Mr. Jatin Zaveri,Adv.
Mr. Neel Kamal Mishra,Adv.
Applicant Mr. J.N. Dubey,Sr.Adv.
(I.A. 371-372/15) Mr. Anurag Dubey,Adv.
Mr. Meenesh Dubey,Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Pandey,Adv.
Mr. S.R. Setia,Adv.
Mr. D.N. Goburdhun,Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Aggarwal,Adv.
Mr. Lal Ramtiamma,Adv.
Mr. Vijay Panjwani,Adv.
Hon'ble the Chief Justice, Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri and
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi pronounced the order of the Bench
giving certain directions in the interlocutory applications, in
terms of the signed order.
Post on Tuesday, the 5th
January, 2016.
(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed Reportable order is placed on the file)

13. 13